The lesson of the ‘climategate’ emails, the ‘hockeystick wars’, and the recent ‘pause’ is that the IPCC reports have a tendency to be self-serving. Blind faith in the IPCC projections shows subjectivity, if not outright naïveté. To the degree that studies base their estimates on a rate of warming far greater than observed, published extinction estimates from climate change should also be down graded.

Then later:

Don't worry too much over those warmist predictions that millions of species will soon be lost to climate change. Judging by their methods it is the doomsayers who are the real dodos.

Anthony Continues re mass extinctions:

The IPPC didn’t think mass extinctions were happening in a draft paper. And even when the concession in the draft paper was cleaned up (peer pressure) the IPCC contradicts itself about extinctions as renowned ecologist Professor Botkin notes.

Nature is the expert on extinctions with more than 99% of all animals which have ever existed now extinct.

The IPCC has drawn attention to an apparent leveling-off of globally-averaged
temperatures over the past 15 years or so. Measuring the duration of the hiatus has
implications for determining if the underlying trend has changed, and for evaluating
climate models. Here I propose a method for estimating the duration of the hiatus that is
robust to heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation in the temperature series and to cherrypicking
of endpoints. For the specific case of global warming I also add the requirement
of spatial consistency between hemispheres. The method makes use of a HAC-robust
trend variance estimator which is valid under autocorrelation of unknown form as long as
the underlying series is trend stationary, which is the case for the data used herein.

Application of the method shows that there is now a trendless interval of 19 years
duration at the end of the HadCRUT4 surface temperature series, and of 16-26 years in
the lower troposphere. Use of a simple AR1 trend model suggests a shorter hiatus of 14-
20 years but is likely unreliable.

Box 9.2: Climate Models and the Hiatus in Global-Mean Surface Warming of the Past 15 Years

The observed global-mean surface temperature (GMST) has shown a much smaller increasing linear trend over the past 15 years than over the past 30 to 60 years (Section 2.4.3, Figure 2.20, Table 2.7; Figure 9.8; Box 9.2 Box 9.2 Figure 1a,c). Depending on the observational data set, the GMST trend over 1998–2012 is estimated to be around one-third to one-half of the trend over 1951–2012 (Section 2.4.3, Table 2.7; Box 9.2 Figure 1a,c). For example, in HadCRUT4 the trend is 0.04 ºC per decade over 1998–2012, compared to 0.11 ºC per decade over 1951–2012. The reduction in observed GMST trend is most marked in Northern- Hemisphere winter (Section 2.4.3, (Cohen et al., 2012)). Even with this “hiatus” in GMST trend, the decade of the 2000s has been the warmest in the instrumental record of GMST (Section 2.4.3, Figure 2.19).

JC summary

My original intention for this thread was to go through and try to map the IPCC’s logical argument. I quickly got dizzy owing to seemingly unwarranted assumptions and incomplete information (such as: did the climate models use the correct external forcing for the first decade of the 21st century, or not?)

Met Office Confirms 2014 Continues Global Warming ‘Pause’

Met Office: "It’s not possible to definitively say which of several recent years was the warmest”

With the release of the 2014 HadCRUT4 data by the UK Met Office, and the previous release of global temperature data by Berkeley Earth, Nasa and Noaa, the main conclusion to be drawn from the data is that 2014 was a warm year, but not statistically distinguishable from most of the years of the past decade or so meaning that the “pause” in global annual average surface temperatures continues.

SS - BS (Bad Science) Myth No 10:

10. Antarctica is
gaining ice. Sure is. Land or sheet ice has to be distinguished from sea
ice which no one disputes is increasing. A slew of papers and research confirm
the sheet ice is increasing. Here. Here.
Here.